The question of whether to ease restrictions on the sale of raw milk, also known as unpasteurized milk, has stirred up considerable debate.

In 1987 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began requiring that milk be pasteurized to kill bacteria. Raw milk contains numerous pathogens, such as salmonella and E. coli 0157:H7, that cause significant food-borne illness and can lead to hospitalization, kidney failure and even death.

Raw milk proponents say the requirement is unfair and point out that farmers are allowed to sell raw meat and raw vegetables — the two biggest sources of food-borne illness. They argue that raw milk shouldn't be treated differently.

Fans of raw milk assert that it tastes sweeter and fresher. They also claim that it fights allergies, digestive problems, eczema, autism, arthritis and learning disabilities, and boosts immunity — properties that they say are removed by pasteurization. The FDA and other public health officials, however, point out that these claims aren't supported by research.

Proponents of pasteurization remind us that prior to pasteurization, raw milk accounted for up to 25 percent of outbreaks of food- and water-borne illness. Now dairy products account for only about 1 percent of outbreaks — 70 percent of those are attributed to raw milk or raw milk cheeses.

Where do you stand on this question? Do you see it as an issue of big government versus the rights of individual producers and consumers? Are you concerned that in this case freedom of choice comes with risk of serious illness?

56 Comments Posted

I am a veterinarian, and I am appalled at the ignorance of our society to believe raw milk is a miracle cure and the "big brother" mentality of government is out to harm the American people. Raw milk is unsafe, period. It has been thoroughly researched and proven; just google brucellosis, tuberculosis, listeriosis, coxiella, staph aureus, enterohemorrhagic ecoli. Modern dairies are not filthy nor cruel to their animals, no matter how many times you watch Food, Inc. Educate yourselves, anecdotal success stories have no basis on this matter.

Robert Smythe, DVM

January 30, 2014 7:28 a.m.

If raw milk production were regulated and batches of milk were periodically tested, the milk would be much safer to drink. It is the sloppy farming that allows FECAL matter into the milk that makes people sick. It is never the milk itself that causes illness, but the contamination of the milk by dirty farming. Keep it clean to keep it safe and it is a superfood! (please reference the absolute success in South Carolina raw milk farming and store sales)
Written by a pregnant woman who consumes 3-4 cups of raw milk daily and who's first son went straight to raw cow's milk after raw breast milk!

Heather Letourneau

October 7, 2013 11:06 a.m.

Iam 53 years old and have consumed raw milk all my life. First from hand milked cows as a child, when we would strain out the manure and hair, untill now as we milk 2 cows with a machine in a very clean enviroment. I have never got sick from raw milk and my doctor only sees me every few years for a physical. I have perfect blood pressure and Cholestrol levels. I take no over the counter or prescription drugs. My brothers, on the other hand have struggled with multiple health problems associated with this modern age. The only difference between us is our diet. They don't drink raw milk, and I drink at least a half gallon daily. I just feel sad that so many people like the FDA who are approving drugs with side affects that are killing people daily.

yanky

October 15, 2012 10:34 p.m.

I drink Pennsylvania certified organic raw milk. It is tested once per week and is perfectlty safe to drink.
You should not drink raw milk from any place at all. I must come from a clean source, of course and from grass fed cows.
The FDA is so currupt! They put flouride in our water, allow high fructose corn syrup and artificial sweetners in food - to hell with anyting the FDA says about food safety.

Greg

September 1, 2012 11:24 p.m.

I agree with most of the comments here including this one by Tony:
So when exactly did the Mayo Clinic discontinue the Milk Cure?

Anonymous

July 2, 2012 9:42 p.m.

I think that anyone who has researched the pros and cons, then sees fit to drink raw milk to gain the enormous benefits, does so as an informed individual. Government needs to butt out, afterall, why trust them, they advocate adding fluoride - a know toxin to our water. I know what I want in my body, and I am am intelligent enough to find a clean place to get raw milk. people who want to drink it, are well researched on the subject.
I think that one of the reasons it is frowned upon, is that it is of such great benefit to the body that it may actually heal and cure some illnesses where pharmaceuticals will kill you.

liz

April 30, 2012 11:12 a.m.

I have endometriosis, and my husband has a hard time sleeping which caused him to have chest pain. I'm 29 and he's 30. For him to have chest pain at his age isn't good at all. We found a farm 61 miles away from us that sales raw milk and decided to check it out 3 days ago. It was very clean and they millked the cows right infront of us. Although the milk wasn't cheap at a whopping $10 per gallon, it was worth it! My endometriosis hasn't acted up and my husband was able to sleep without the aid of medication and hasn't had any chest pain since. I will never buy store bought milk again! By the way, the feds are nothing but a bunch of money hungry people. The drug companies pay them billions of dollars each year to keep the more natural cures away saying that they're not safe. END THE FED!!

Emily

April 18, 2012 10:11 p.m.

&quot;The FDA and other public health officials, however, point out that these claims aren't supported by research.&quot;
It is nothing more than a grand demonstration of the art of misinformation.
The GABRIELA study is indeed a very comprehensive study involving several thousand European school aged children.
The empirical evidence is absolutely clear regarding the benefits of raw fresh milk.
Yet, the FDA points states &quot;these claims aren't supported by research&quot;. This is the food we do not want to eat!
Jim

Jim

April 4, 2012 12:48 p.m.

Raw milk must be an individual choice. If there are health concerns you should address the causes of those issues, such as cleanliness. If we outlawed every food that made anyone ill there would no longer be any foods left. I want to be able to buy fresh produce (including cantalopes), non-irradiated meats, raw eggs, etc.
Anyone selling raw milk through retail outlets should be regulated and inspected just like the farms providing the carrots.
Conventional milk really is produced under the most toxic (hormones, antibiotics, no grass) filthy conditions imaginable, that &quot;milk&quot; has to be pasturized as there is nothing safe about it. Milk for the raw market must be produced under very strict guidelines.
However, if there are farmers who want to do that, and people that want to buy it, then we need to support and encourage it as clean raw milk is a wonderful food packed with healthy fats and vitamins.
I buy raw milk from a local farm, that I have visited. Luckily in my state, one of the few, it's totally legal.

Dee

March 30, 2012 7:15 p.m.

I love raw cheese, and support farms that treat there animals well.

Cristal

February 7, 2012 11:20 p.m.

From the time I was 13 to about 19, my parents had their own milk cow. This was in the 1990's by the way. That was the only milk, cream, cheese and butter we had. Never once did I get sick consuming these products. My father's cholesterol actually improved while consuming these raw dairy products. Our cow was like a family pet. She was well cared for and well fed and we knew that cleanliness was a must. I am convinced that raw dairy from a small, clean dairy is safer and much more nutritious than pasteurized, store-bought milk. Why do you think they have to add Vitamin D and other nutrients to pasteurized milk? It's because the natural nutritive properties of the milk are destroyed as part of the pasteurization process.

Smithy

January 30, 2012 3:40 p.m.

Over 500 people contracted E coli from raw oysters between '95 and '05 and over 250 died. There was an outbreak of E coli from pasteurized cheese in 2010 leaving 38 sick and 15 hospitalized. These are two small examples of food borne illnesses which are never discussed or draw SWAT style raids of federal agents. Knowledge is power - quit being so gullible and swallowing everything the feds feed you.

Hunchman

January 30, 2012 3:02 p.m.

Pasteurization was developed as a result of growing urban populations and the huge unsanitary dairy farms which were needed to feed the masses. It was a godsend at the time and considering how disgusting most mega-dairies are, it still is. But milk from a well run, well tested raw dairy is safe. Safer than the white fluid your buying at WalMart. Mega-Dairy hates the growth of demand of raw-milk because they can't compete - they're too dirty and they know they can't afford to create sanitary dairy's to meet the growing demand. Are you still believing the crock that the Feds are somehow a branch of 'We The People'? They're the gestapo goons for corporations - all large corporations. Just bc the feds attribute illness to their enemy number one, it doesn't, and never has had to be the truth.

Jim

December 12, 2011 5:48 p.m.

I really do not care if people choose raw milk- I eat raw oysters and wild mushrooms but I am tired of the health claims that are not backed by any science. These folks are the same as the science denying climate change disbelievers.

GOTSCIENCE?

November 29, 2011 8:33 a.m.

I grew up in Ireland in the 1970s. Then you could still buy raw milk from farmers - straight from the cow. The regular instances of bacterial infections in children and old people because of raw milk were very frightening. Raw milk carries disease . It can kill you! Not everything that's natural is good for you... like Bovine TB.If you disagree with pasteurization for some reason avoid all milk.Its not possible to choose a farm and decide it safe every day !

mairead

August 17, 2011 11:01 p.m.

There is a major logical hole in the following insinuation:
&quot;Proponents of pasteurization remind us that prior to pasteurization, raw milk accounted for up to 25 percent of outbreaks of food- and water-borne illness. Now dairy products account for only about 1 percent of outbreaks&quot;
It could be that before the 1900s, prior to pasteurization's adoption, the pumping, storing, handling, transportation, and home storage of milk were all factors THEN (not necessarily TODAY) in such outbreaks. For instance, home refrigerators only became widely adopted after 1930, well after pasteurization. Relevance? E Coli does not multiply nearly as much under refrigeration as it does at room temperature.

Parisa

April 30, 2011 9:56 p.m.

Just started drinking raw kefir. I was amazed that it cleared up a problem I had been having for months within just a few days. Something that the pasteurized version had not helped. I'm an educated adult perfectly capable of making nutrition decisions for myself and my family.

Rachael

April 8, 2011 3:57 p.m.

I have never had raw milk but I have been trying to get it for over a year. I would like to be able to decide for myself if drinking it makes any difference I can get raw fish, spinach, chopmeat,and peanut-butter all which have been recalled for contamination. The only reason I see for raw milk being illegal is in that it really does help all these health problems and Big Pharma would have the money sucked out of it's pockets and kept in the consumer's pockets when their pills aren't needed. I'm tired of the government playing my parent and telling me that it know's better than I do what's good for me. I may not always make the right choices but isn't what freedom is all about, to make even a wrong choice sometime.

barbara

April 7, 2011 3:23 p.m.

Weston Price was also an advocate of including &quot;healthy fats&quot; in one's diet.
http://www.westonaprice.org/

Lori

April 7, 2011 3:17 p.m.

I live in Chicago and I've been drinking raw milk for over six years. I have never gotten sick from it. In fact, I rarely, if ever get sick anymore.I was in a car accident that left me with severe nerve damage, arthritis, and osteo-necrosis(bone death) I never have any more joint pain. Our bodies need healthy bacteria to cleanse itself. Raw milk contains raw fat. We need some &quot;healthy fats&quot; to pull toxins out of our bodies. (Avocados and coconuts are also healthy fats) A low fat diet is not entirely healthy. Raw fats have a regenerative quality of building and cleansing that is necessary. It saddens me that our present day health care system is purely driven by the profit motive.

Lori

March 25, 2011 1:00 p.m.

I remember as a kid the milkhouse where our milk was strained into milk cans to be picked up by the milk hauler. The milk cans were kept in a spring fed cooling tank. We kids would take a glass into the milkhouse, lift the strainer and put our glasses under to catch the warm, delicious milk. Didn't get any better than that. Now I can't drink milk at all. I must buy almond or coconut milk because I don't like the taste of soy. Lot pricier than raw milk could be and not nearly as tasty. There were 9 kids in my family. None of us got the &quot;usual&quot; sicknesses (except measles, chickenpox, mumps which we passed around on purpose). I truly believe we have sanitized our way into superbugs and other diseases we have no resistance to because we haven't be naturally inoculated against them.

NJ

January 15, 2011 9:01 p.m.

I realize that the focus of this blog is health; however, this issue raises critical legal issues as well. We have become far too complacent in allowing government intrusion into the most private and personal aspects of our lives. Regardless of what we believe about the health benefits of raw milk, it is completely unacceptable and intrusive for the government to require that we ingest processed foods of any kind--including pasteurized milk. Check the labels on your pasteurized skim and 1% or 2% milk. You will see two additives--Vitamin A palmitate and Vitamin D3. Do some Internet research on what those are: synthetic, chemically created (using toxic solvents) additives that replace what is lost when the butterfat is skimmed off. And not on the label: powdered milk (made by a process that some scientists say increases the risk of artheosclerosis) is added in to replicate the flavor lost when the cream is skimmed. Pasteurization is more than just heat treatment--we need to educate ourselves, then take back our right to choose our food.

Elizabeth

December 3, 2010 11:10 p.m.

So when exactly did the Mayo Clinic discontinue the Milk Cure?

Tony

September 7, 2010 12:24 a.m.

I have read 2 articles on the Mayo Clinic website and am very disappointed in both. the first article was on dioxins coming from plastic. Zeratsky blames soil water fat fires &amp; burning household trash w/o explanation, while giving &quot;chemical &amp; industrial processes&quot; very little blame. This is a person bent on blaming individuals and nature for dioxin contamination when this is known not to be the case
-
When it comes to the focus of her article, plastics in the microwave or fridge transferring dioxins to food, she states &quot;this isn't thought to be true&quot;
-
What? The Mayo Clinic's nutrition representative, writing an article on dioxins in our food, blames people &amp; nature for dioxin contamination then says she doesn't know if plastic contaminates food, then lists things to do to avoid the contamination she claims may not occur...
-
Now with the story on raw milk, Zeratsky displays the same disrespect for the truth as she had in the dioxin story. She uses fear-mongering &quot;cause significant food-borne illness and can lead to hospitalization, kidney failure and even death&quot; to scare us into line with the corporate philosophy regarding milk consumption
-
Unfortunately I am not surprised, but very disappointed
-
Michael

michael0156

September 3, 2010 7:44 p.m.

I'm surprised that the Mayo Clinic doesn't come out on the side of raw milk. It's not processed like white flour and most pre-packaged foods and it's been around for thousands of years. The Mayo Clinic used a raw milk therapy once upon a time, what happened?

We bought our own cow after raw milk helped cure my husband of chronic illness. I used to think it was just the dairy lobbies trying to shut down sales from private one-cow families but now I think it's even more than that. I finished reading &quot;The Milk Diet&quot; by a doctor who cured patients of virtually everything with his special raw milk protocol. I learned that one of the founders of the Mayo Clinic was also a raw milk proponent and reported excellent results. What this means is that if correct use of raw milk can cure ourselves of most diseases without the aid of toxic drugs with debilitating side effects (which beget the use of even more drugs) then raw milk is indeed threatening to a very big (and political) industry.
When I bought my cow, I had to show her papers to no less than three USDA agents and they parked in front of my house for several days after that (I presume to see if I was selling milk). Talk about paranoia. I wish they would go after the meth users and illegal immigrants as much as me and my one little cow.

Sharon

July 20, 2010 7:50 a.m.

As a child I suffered from asthma, allergies, and eczema. Moreover, I sustained a severe injury to my skull and spine during an accident before age 10. All of the above compelled my family to trust the MDs, allergists, and nutritionists. Thirty years of hell ensued. I am now 39, and I do not hesitate to state that I would not be alive if it were not for raw milk (from grass-fed cows). This is not a &quot;claim;&quot; I am living proof of the effectiveness of this &quot;white blood.&quot; I have consumed well over 2500 gallons of raw milk over the past 6 years, with nothing but positive results. I have won my life back, and the medical industry has lost my business for life.
The doctors were always quick to prescribe corticosteroids to treat the symptoms, but always failed to mention that naturally high doses of pure, easily assimilated and utilized cortisol could be found in every glass of raw milk. Never once was I advised to look to mother nature for the answers. Well, shame on them, but also shame on us for going right along with them.
Let me conclude by quoting one of the greats of the Mayo Foundation itself (pre-Mayo Clinic), Dr. J. Crewe: &quot;For more than 16 years I have conducted a small sanitarium where milk is used almost exclusively in the treatment of various diseases. The results have been so regularly satisfactory that I have naturally become enthusiastic and interested in this method of treating disease.&quot;
Thank you, Mayo Clinic, for honoring your own

Hayes

June 10, 2010 3:17 a.m.

In the summer of 2009 I drank raw cow and goat milk. I never got sick once and I was &quot;rolling the dice&quot; everyday for 90 days. I will never touch pasteurized milk again. Also, don't be fooled, the only &quot;real&quot; reason the dairy industry wants milk pasteurized is because it significantly extends the shelf life of there product. PS. There are people in the world trying to pasteurize eggs in the shell! Find all of these people all and kill them before there ruin another amazing food! (The &quot;killing them&quot; part was a joke, don't do anything stupid because I think they only serve pasteurized milk in prison. lol)

laurence

June 9, 2010 8:27 p.m.

Seems like from the comments and personal testimonies below that there are 2 logical conclusions from all this:
1: Clean and proper handling of raw foods (including milk) is REQUIRED. Poor hygienic and improper handling of anything raw WILL cause adverse effects and health issues.
2: Raw milk from cows has many health benefits that are in fact killed off and nullified by pasteurization. Ultra-pasteurization even causes free form L-Glutamine amino acids in the milk (by separating the amino acid from it's protein binding) which alone is responsible for MANY adverse health effects in the world to include autism and cancer, it's a processed building block of DNA which cells use as instructions to operate.
If I want to ingest anything which some overpaid institution questions as healthy I should have the choice to do so. So I can prove them wrong. My question is: why is America always being led by what corporations and bought-and-paid-for institutions say?
http://theneches.blogspot.com.

Khazik

June 8, 2010 5:43 p.m.

I reluctantly changed from pasturized to raw milk for a year during my teens. Although a sickly kid, I never got sick from the milk. I didn't like it for several months; after all it was thicker than normal whole milk (even with the cream skimmed off) and tasted like whatever weed, grass or flower the cows ate the day before). I did adjust to it and eventually liked it as well as pasturized. It came from about five miles away, from a family-member farm. We also ate fresh eggs from down the street from family-raised free range chickens, rabbits butchered on a back-yard chopping block, chickens we had to help kill/pluck from five miles away, venison that suddenly appeared on a kitchen table (just feet from my homework) to be butchered, and all types of pork from what seemed like a family pet strung up in the garage just hours before. All natural, but far from natural behavior for a city girl. None-the-less, we never got sick from any of it.

Cheryl

May 17, 2010 9:01 a.m.

Just to be accurate, salmonella and E. coli 0157:H7, don't come from raw milk, rather they are CONTAMINATES that come from other sources. The Proponents of pasteurization may well be motivated by industry profits and therefore their opinions may be contaminated.
Its funny that there are now yogurts adding live (good) bacterias to their pasteurized products and claiming digestive health benefits. First we have to kill the good stuff and then add good stuff back, I guess there is profit in Processing food.

Jim

May 6, 2010 8:19 p.m.

Pasteurization was an extraordinarily sound choice for protecting public health. But, so long as no raw-milk-born diseases are directly communicable then certainly allow raw milk fans to play roulette with their own health, and that of their children.
If long odds sound like a safe bet..... even with your life at stake, then spin the wheel. And, if the odds do swing against a few....they certainly will remember to say, &quot; I insisted I knew best and that I would handle the risk.&quot;

Kent

May 6, 2010 2:11 p.m.

This is kind of silly, but I want to know where people get raw milk that tastes sweeter than homogenized. The raw milk we tried recently tasted like clover--not pleasant at all.
I'm with Anita on having a choice being good.

Wendy

May 5, 2010 9:11 p.m.

Anything that is &quot;dirty&quot; can and will infect you! Example: if you eat an organic apple or a non-organic apple (it does not matter) IF THE person that picked, packed, unpacked AND placed the food ON the stand used the toilet and did not wash his/her hands before... you may ingest bacteria or ??? Additionally, the transportation meduim : a truck, a train, a knap-sack can also add to the possibility of contamination! If ANY food is kept 100% &quot;CLEAN!!!!&quot; THE FACTOR OF BEING RAW IS NOT THE CULPRIT!!!! But, rather the hand, the conveyance, or the packing that touches will infect!!! That is why a doctor is &quot; supposed&quot; to wear &quot;Disposable&quot; gloves when examining you! Bacteria and viruses have $$$$$$ attached! If we hired all the food handlers with Ph.D.'s then the price of food would be beyind the reach of many! So we compromise! I have complained more than once when I saw a food handler displaying organic apples...after blowing his nose! We can't put a &quot;bacteria&quot; policeman&quot; in every food chain!!! BUT, We can wash the apple when we get home! However, we cannot &quot;wash the millk.&quot; So we heat or boil it! The best we can do is to &quot;EDUCATE&quot; ALL TO BE AS &quot;CLEAN AS POSSIBLE.&quot; EVEN THE &quot;BOSS&quot; WHO IS JUST INTERESTED IN MAKING $$$$$

Andre

May 5, 2010 7:17 a.m.

Having a choice is never a bad thing.

Anita

May 3, 2010 1:26 a.m.

@Charmaine....
Raw Milk contains enzymes and lactase producing bacteria needed by our bodies to break down and assimilate the milk sugar lactose. These helpful bacteria are killed in the pasteurization/homogenization process. Due to the presence of lactase in Raw Milk, people with lactose intolerance are normally able to consume non-processed dairy products without any ill effect.

Michael

May 3, 2010 1:08 a.m.

I would respectfully suggest that the Doctor's Nelson &amp; Zeratsky due some more research into this topic, so as to have a more informed opinion prior to writing an article. The following sentance; &quot;The FDA and other public health officials, however, point out that these claims aren't supported by research.&quot; shows me that you two are either not fully up to speed on this topic, or have a bias against raw milk. There have been several reputable medical studies conducted across europe that do in fact support those claims. As well as numerous studies that show cause for concern regarding hidden health hazards of both pasteurization and Homogenization of milk.
Due to being limited to 1500 characters I won't be able to cite every study or medical article in support of my comments, nor the long list of medical professionals (MD's, DD's, ND's, RD's, FACN's, CNS's, CCN's) in support of Raw Milk and Raw milk related research and studies. Instead I implore you to have some integrity and actually take the time to become informed before hoping on the FDA bandwagon.
Look up: J. R. Crewe, MD... Weston A Price, DDS... and Ron Schmid, ND for starters. Once you're up to speed on that you might be interested to know that over here in Germany we still use the same basic methods as Dr. Crewe to successfully treat and in rare causes cure IBD?
For folks leaving comments; Use an open mind, and perhaps a grain of salt or two... an head over to realmilk.com to get a different persp

Michael

April 30, 2010 9:50 a.m.

A person named Celia has posted below that she feels she must drink raw milk because she is &quot;lactose intolerant.&quot; Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a person who is truly lactose intolerant have problems with milk products in general? Lactose intolerance apparently has to do with the inability to digest milk sugars, and are not milk sugars present in the raw product too?

Charmaine

April 30, 2010 9:21 a.m.

While visiting in India during the 1990's, I stayed in a few rural or even city residential places that brewed their morning tea with milk from a family cow every morning. After milking the cow (or cows, depending on the number of people to be served), a metal bucket was carried into the kitchen and the milk was boiled for some time before anyone ever drank it.
The same with preparation of yogurt; the milk went through a heating process before it was put into a bowl and left in a cupboard overnight for &quot;curd rice&quot; the next day.
No matter how simple the lifestyle of the people, noone ever filled a glass from the udder and drank it. It isn't the same as when a human baby takes milk from its human mother.

Charmaine

April 30, 2010 4:58 a.m.

As long as raw milk comes from a licensed store or farm, I don't see a problem. I am lacto intolerant, and raw milk is the only dairy I can drink. People depend on pasteurization for cleaness so it doesn't matter how old or dirty the milk is when it reaches the plant.

Celia

April 28, 2010 1:36 a.m.

People who grew up on raw milk consumed it at or near the farm, so fresh that even special cooling was not needed to keep down bacteria. Now, huge farms and long-distance transportation of milk require extra attention to keep it from making people sick. My neighbor got a terrible listeriosis from eating unpasturized cheese and is still brain-damaged.

Mary

April 27, 2010 8:51 p.m.

WE are encourage to eat fresh veggies and fruit, raw and steamed because of the health benefits as cooking kills most of the nutrition in them. I grew up with raw milk and for 4 generations there was never a problem. It all depends on the farmer and how clean he keeps is livestock. If you buy from someone who takes care of his cows there isn't a problem. We were always picky about where our milk came from. Just like buying anything else - you need to research the supplier.

Kathy

April 27, 2010 6:23 p.m.

I have read the stupid reports about the safety of pasteurized milk but that is because they have killed all the benefit out of the milk. I used to drink raw milk and I was well and never got sick but after pasteurization I fell victim to all sorts of problems. Bring back raw milk and health will improve.

Dan

April 27, 2010 4:58 p.m.

I grew up on raw milk and never had a problem. My wife also used raw milk till our local farmer died.
The secret is proper handling. Growing up, we got the milk within minutes of the milking and it went directly to our refrigerator. Mom had 11 kids and none had problems. Clean handling and proper storage is the secret.

Lynn

April 27, 2010 2:56 p.m.

Raw milk still causes diseases in my local area, and I would not like to see legislative changes.

Sue

April 27, 2010 2:52 p.m.

I grew up consuming raw milk and its products and consider myself very luck to have avoided: Bovine Tuberculosis; Listeriosis; eColi Infection; and the list goes on. There is a reason for pasteurization and its for our protection. I love the taste of raw milk, especially when its still steaming in the pail but I would not drink it today. Raw Milk may offer protection from various problems but so does many other things. We need the pasteurization.

barbara

April 25, 2010 4:27 a.m.

Since raw milk is so much more digestible than pasteurized milk testing should be done to see if it would be beneficial in reducing osteoporosis. My children were healthy and completely tooth decay free while young and consuming gallons and gallons of fresh raw milk from a Jersey herd grazing on the hills of Vermont. They loved it and I loved it-cooking with it is incredible. Unlike pasteurized milk it is refreshing and thirst quenching-delicioius and it is healthful.

Elizabeth

April 24, 2010 6:44 p.m.

&quot;prior to pasteurization, raw milk accounted for up to 25% of outbreaks of food...&quot; This statement implies that it was pasteurization that cleared the problems up. I heard that these problems were eliminated before pasteurization was mandated. Pasteurization started in the mid 1940's after the problems were eliminated through better hygiene and eliminating the urban farms that were the source of the problem. It's a sly way of stating a fact to imply something that isn't true.

Alan

April 24, 2010 4:58 p.m.

Health risk. I had a close friend fall ill due to raw milk consumption. People manage dairy farms and people make mistakes.

Cindy

April 24, 2010 2:47 p.m.

A great new site on raw milk pros and cons is www.realrawmilkfacts.com

Bill

April 24, 2010 12:43 p.m.

Cheeses made from unpasteurized milk is part of the success of the very best cheeeses in the world.
Unpasteurized milk should be sold as an option. Maybe additional care in processing should be mandated.

Bud

April 24, 2010 10:50 a.m.

I believe that raw milk should be made available to anyone that wants to consume it. Sure there are risks
however, those risks are eliminated with 100% free range cattle, all the risks reported can be connected to all the growth hormones, antibiotics and who knows what other drugs to speed up the growth for maximum profit. I had the pleasure of visiting Slovenia recently,
and had my first taste of raw milk, squirted into a tall glass compliments of Anja, who was 100% free range and drug free, I never had any health problems after, and I never felt as good after drinking pasturised as I did drinking raw milk. Give us that choice, as we know the risks just as we know the risks of a fast food diet, smoking and drinking alcohol which have all been known to kill in one way or another, yet why is no one is debating whether or not to put restrictions on these?

Marjan

April 23, 2010 8:04 p.m.

we must get raw milk, like raw meat @ vegetables

George

April 23, 2010 3:09 p.m.

My understanding is that pasteurization &quot;denatures&quot; or renders useless some of the very important amino acids (especially branched chain amino acids) in milk. Additionally, pasteurization removes some of the immune system boosters (immunoglobulins). These elements reportedly help boost glutathione in the body. So, I think raw milk should be available to those who desire to consume it.

Legal Conditions and Terms

Reprint Permissions

A single copy of these materials may be reprinted for noncommercial personal use only. "Mayo," "Mayo Clinic," "MayoClinic.org," "Mayo Clinic Healthy Living," and the triple-shield Mayo Clinic logo are trademarks of Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.